On Thu, 31 May 2007, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Thu, May 31, 2007 at 11:46:31AM -0700, Davide Libenzi wrote: > > On Thu, 31 May 2007, Ulrich Drepper wrote: > > > Davide Libenzi wrote: > > > > Isn't this better be a global process flag? Default should be, for > > > > legacy > > > > reasons, > > > > > > No. Policies are always wrong since it means code that cannot change > > > the policy (e.g, all runtime libraries) have no access to the > > > functionality. I cannot set the policy to default to close-on-exit in > > > glibc all the while the application assumes this is not the case. > > > > I was talking for a broader usage, not only glibc centric. Most ppl > > writing MT+exec apps wants all but (eventually) and handfull of files > > leaking across the exec boundary. > > If open (and all other syscalls that create fds) have O_CLOEXEC (and > something similar for other syscalls), then such a policy can be easily > implemented on the userland, if desired.
That, unless you change all the syscalls creating files to accept new parameters, would require a syscall+fcntl operation. That is not atomic (ie, another thread might do exec between the syscall and the fcntl). Again, mine was a general comment, not directed into magically fixing existing buggy code. What I meant, was that the vast majority of MT+exec apps wants all their fds (but an handfull, maybe) to be O_CLOEXEC. So a global, non-inheritable, per-process flag seemed the most straightforward solution. - Davide - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
